Intel microserver leaves $2.5B door open for ARM

SANTA CLARA, Calif.--Intel’s first microserver processor is less power efficient than its existing Xeon chips, leaving a significant opportunity for alternative SoCs, according to Linley Gwennap, principal of the Linley Group.

Intel released last year the Atom S1000, also known as Centerton, a dual core chip meant to fend off mainly ARM-based server SoCs from a growing group of vendors. While it reduced power consumption to 6.3W, it does not support Ethernet, Serial ATA or USB controllers or multithreading.

“According to data Intel provided, this chip is less power efficient than its Xeon, so it seems like we are going in the wrong direction,” Gwennap said. “It’s not really a system on a chip yet, it has significantly lower performance and only uses 32-nm process technology,” he said at the Linley Data Center Conference here.

Gwennap characterized the chip as a placeholder for Avoton, a 22-nm CPU with a new Atom core. “They haven’t announced what it is yet, and it will not be in production until the second half of the year,” he added.

Linley Group recently released a report that projects alternative server SoCs will compete for an available market of $2.5 billion by 2016. That’s about 30 percent of a server processor market that the report estimated is edging toward $10 billion a year. The forecast assumes Microsoft will not have a version of Windows Server for ARM during that period.

Both sides have their challenges, Gwennap noted. ARM server SoCs need to port x86 server software, they won’t support 64-bit addressing until later this year and they have a lower single-thread performance than the x86, he said. In addition, Intel has a process edge and will use it to roll 14-nm chips in 2014.

On the other hand, the x86 architecture was designed for best single-thread performance. As such it is encumbered by complexities such as an ability to manage up to 168 instructions simultaneously in flight in the latest chips and up to 192 in the next-generation Haswell.

“There’s a lot of logic just moving data around without doing useful computations,” Gwennap said.

Click on image to enlarge.

The typical Xeon has blocks geared to support dozens of instructions in flight, said Gwennap.

Showing the integration gap, Gwennap compared an existing ARM server SoC to an Intel Xeon platform. A slide on that comparison follows along with slides from Calxeda and Applied Micro Circuits Corp. who participated in a panel.Related stories:

Intel won't even be able to keep the server market together, let alone enter the mobile market. It doesn't look like Intel's chips be competitive with all the different ARM SoC's coming out next year (and in quad core or higher versions).

ASP disruption ahead:
“Intel is getting away with huge margins because there’s not a lot of competition, but I think we will see with more competition the prices come down as well as the power.”
--Linley Gwennap on the server CPU business

well defined race Performance/Watt/$.
even if Intel leads, margins are going to come down...
Do not underestimate if Samsung playing in this market later....even though they are consumer electronics...deep pocket can do many things...

Former Cyrix, NexGen, ARM, AMD, IDT, as discovery TA in FTC case v intel, as an analyst following the intersection of x86 and ARM I’m for ARM server. With that track record in Intel town who wouldn’t be for ARM server silicon and systems underdogs.
There is surely a play here where this analyst has stated ARM server as a viable business. Question is where are the product and price voids in Intel Xeon structure. Unlike other analyst’s who position ARM purely against Atom, this analyst believes ARM architecture can address the entire Xeon performance spread from E3 to 46xx. Dense ARM on blades is a viable high margin business. Multiple ARMs on blade is where the producer values is in ARM server; in multiple processor blades v Xeon.
In this article Linley speculates Centerton a place holder for Avoton where this analyst finds Centerton a monopolists attempt to position inferior dual core v ARM quad ready for the dumping as Avoton up to eight cores and integrated hub is launched speculated at 17w power. Where Avoton may already be launched shown by Intel on dual chip micro blades at Open Compute.
Centerton is not a place holder but presents a financial barrier verse all ARM SOCs. That is meant by Intel too suck ARM financial value out of production and distribution channels as Centerton is dumped at price less than Intel average fixed cost per unit of production. Likely in sales package with higher margin product where Centerton is essentially priced for free. So here we have competition Intel style no matter the product category.
Mike Bruzzone. Camp Marketing

Linley places ARM Server at $2.5 billion by 2016 and in earlier report $3 bil.
This analyst on Sandy displacement puts ARM at perf ratio 4 1.4 GHz Quad to 1 Xeon 2 GHz Hexa at 56,917,517 units. Analyst suggests ARM value higher then Linely’s $50 placing in Atom land that cannot be sustainable outcome.
Report shows ARM server incorporates more system blocks that equates to value in price for functionality. If not ARM server may not be a viable high margin business as margin is the driver to attract foundries to rip chunks of revenue from the monopolist which is the primary attraction.
Currently 25 million Atom are produced every cycle, average price $60 value $1.5 billion. Sandy Xeon v ARM on 1:1 unit displacement revenue priced under $250 + Atom = 39,932,527 units value $4,082,044,422. Increase value of ARM blade verse Xeon to $625 including Atom on 1:1 displacement equals 50 million units value $11 billion. For ARM server to displace one quarter of this revenue delivers Linley’s revenue estimate.
Interesting quandary is ratio of ARM v Xeon to achieve similar perf; here 1:1 & in above example 4:1. Recall producer margin is in the blades not the individual components regardless of functionality.
Where one question beyond Samsung is what will attract the foundry; 50 million v 200,000,000 ARM server chips per year; and at what price & margin.
Needless to say speculation until whole platform delivered meaning optimized software. Where if this year total ARM server chips reach 50,000 units or minimally 1,000 validation systems that is a step in the right direction for achieving ARM server success.
The missing component then is you, the engineer and applications programmer, call APM, Calxeda and Boston, Marvell and Cogent and order your development system today. If you need a fast smart switch that can search and store at power well utilized ARM Server is worth developing into other than an Intel monopoly future.
Mike Bruzzone, Camp Marketing